tldr; started game not covering C-gap, Rams kept running through C-gap, changed scheme to cover C-gap.
Q: WTF KIND OF SCHEME ARE THE SEAHAWKS RUNNING THAT ALWAYS LEAVES C-GAP UNNACCOUNTED FOR? WHO ACTUALLY DESIGNS A SCHEME LIKE THIS?
Where did you get that the defense left the C gap unaccounted for. In every defense, there's a strength and a weakness. A good o coordinator can find ways to exploit that weakness. And a defense with players still adjusting to a sceme that requires a high degree of communication is more susceptible to having moments when it's own unforced errors get it burned.
Nothing was left anaccounted for. It was a simple matter of the Rams manipulating the board in a way that gave them leverage against our weak link.
As the defense gets more experience, those weaknesses will become much more difficult to exploit.
I think lost in all of this is the desire on PCs and the D staffs part to innovate a defensive approach. The LOB defense was hailed for its simplicity, but it was made simple and adaptable by smart players who communicated well to assure each guy was where he needed to be. The scheme itself and responsibilities within it weren't necessarily simple. It was made to look that way in the fluidity with which it was executed.
It seems Pete, Hurtt and the staff are engineering the next evolution of that defense and its simply a matter of the players grasping every possible variation of its execution.
Steep learning curve, but once it clicks, great results.
www.seahawks.net
